Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      

*NEW* Login or register using your Facebook account.

Not a member? Join the fastest growing conservative community!
Membership is free and takes 15 seconds


CLICK HERE or use Facebook to login or register ----> Connect



Goto page 1, 2  Next  

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 2
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Craig
Site Admin




Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 4415
Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8
votes: 36

PostPosted: Mon Mar 16, 2009 10:17 pm    Post subject: Scientists Claim Earth Is Undergoing Natural Climate Shift Reply with quote

Another nail in the man-made global warming coffin...

Quote:
Scientists at the university used a math application known as synchronized chaos and applied it to climate data taken over the past 100 years.

"Imagine that you have four synchronized swimmers and they are not holding hands and they do their program and everything is fine; now, if they begin to hold hands and hold hands tightly, most likely a slight error will destroy the synchronization. Well, we applied the same analogy to climate," researcher Dr. Anastasios Tsonis said.

Scientists said that the air and ocean systems of the earth are now showing signs of synchronizing with each other.

Eventually, the systems begin to couple and the synchronous state is destroyed, leading to a climate shift.

"In climate, when this happens, the climate state changes. You go from a cooling regime to a warming regime or a warming regime to a cooling regime. This way we were able to explain all the fluctuations in the global temperature trend in the past century," Tsonis said. "The research team has found the warming trend of the past 30 years has stopped and in fact global temperatures have leveled off since 2001."

The most recent climate shift probably occurred at about the year 2000.

Now the question is how has warming slowed and how much influence does human activity have?

"But if we don't understand what is natural, I don't think we can say much about what the humans are doing. So our interest is to understand -- first the natural variability of climate -- and then take it from there. So we were very excited when we realized a lot of changes in the past century from warmer to cooler and then back to warmer were all natural," Tsonis said.


http://www.wisn.com/weather/18935841/detail.html
Rusty Bedsprings





Joined: 06 Dec 2008
Posts: 1629

votes: 5

PostPosted: Tue Mar 17, 2009 7:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ya but those scientists don't count, they're just rouge. :roll:
kwlafayette





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 6155
Reputation: 156.2Reputation: 156.2
votes: 28
Location: Saskatoon Saskatchewan

PostPosted: Tue Mar 17, 2009 9:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

That is the thing about untestable hypotheses; you can simply claim successor failure, and it is also untestable. There is no rational ground from which you can argue either for or against it.

All predictions of the warmists have failed to materialize; is it because they were wrong, or because their early efforts were successful in averting disaster?
DavidK





Joined: 22 Nov 2008
Posts: 1520
Reputation: 68.5
votes: 5
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Tue Mar 17, 2009 1:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kwlafayette wrote:
That is the thing about untestable hypotheses; you can simply claim successor failure, and it is also untestable. There is no rational ground from which you can argue either for or against it.

All predictions of the warmists have failed to materialize; is it because they were wrong, or because their early efforts were successful in averting disaster?


Either way, they'll claim that the efforts had a positive effect.
FF_Canuck





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 3360
Reputation: 73.4
votes: 17
Location: Southern Alberta

PostPosted: Tue Mar 17, 2009 4:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Matt Groenig wrote:
Homer: “Not a bear in sight. The Bear Patrol is working like a charm!”

Lisa : “That’s specious reasoning, dad.”

Homer: "Thank you, Lisa!"

Lisa : “By your logic, I could claim that this rock keeps tigers away."

Homer: “Hmm; how does it work?”

Lisa: “It doesn’t work; it’s just a stupid rock!”

Homer: “Uh-huh.”

Lisa: “… but I don’t see any tigers around, do you?”

Homer: “Lisa, I want to buy your rock…”
Rusty Bedsprings





Joined: 06 Dec 2008
Posts: 1629

votes: 5

PostPosted: Tue Mar 17, 2009 5:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I saw an article a couple days ago that explained that according to the Inuit (people like to listen to natives when they sing the right tune) Polar bears are doing better than fine, that their populations are up over the last 50 years. But again nobody will care because they aren't singing along with AL gore+friends. :roll:
fkarcha





Joined: 16 Feb 2008
Posts: 31
Reputation: 33.3Reputation: 33.3Reputation: 33.3
votes: 3
Location: Winnipeg, MB

PostPosted: Wed Apr 15, 2009 10:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, do you prefer to believe the Inuit, or the scientific method. The Inuit are seeing more polar bears. There are alot of explanations for that. People in Churchill MB see more polar bears as the ice begins to freeze over. But has the actual number of polar bears increased? No, their behaviour is simply driving them to a common location. In the case of the Inuit, polar bears are searching inland for more food -- where the people are -- so of course more will be seen. That does not translate to a high total number of bears.
FF_Canuck





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 3360
Reputation: 73.4
votes: 17
Location: Southern Alberta

PostPosted: Wed Apr 15, 2009 11:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Fkarcha, do you realize that polar bear populations are actually quite healthy? That's what actual population research has shown.

The idea that the polar bears are in danger, and the movement to list them as endangered, is based entirely on an apocolyptic interpretation of AGW theory, not on population studies. The reason that there is a political movement aimed at achieving endangered status for Polar Bears is because the science does not otherwise indicate that they are at risk.

Here's an excerpt from an interview with a scientist who has been studying polar bear populations for two decades:
[quote="FC: We keep hearing that the polar bear is threatened and in decline. Is that true?

MT: Polar bears, as a species, do not appear to be threatened or in decline based on the data that I’ve seen at the present time, although some populations do seem to be experiencing deleterious effects from climate change...

...FC: The Inuit have objected to southern governments designating “threatened” or “endangered” status for the polar bear. Why is that?

MT: Because they are not in danger of extinction. According to a recent article, many Inuit feel that the current time is the “time with the most bears”. Many Inuit have also participated in scientific studies of polar bears over the years. So their experience is not consistent with the notion that polar bears are threatened or endangered or declining.[/quote]
Read the whole thing, I find it to be a pretty balanced presentation of what's happening.

[/img]
fkarcha





Joined: 16 Feb 2008
Posts: 31
Reputation: 33.3Reputation: 33.3Reputation: 33.3
votes: 3
Location: Winnipeg, MB

PostPosted: Thu Apr 16, 2009 7:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

FF_Canuck wrote:
Fkarcha, do you realize that polar bear populations are actually quite healthy? That's what actual population research has shown.



I did not say anyhing, one way or the other, about the actual conservation status of polar bears.
TJRanth





Joined: 16 Feb 2009
Posts: 50
Reputation: 2

PostPosted: Thu Apr 16, 2009 9:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

fkarcha wrote:
FF_Canuck wrote:
Fkarcha, do you realize that polar bear populations are actually quite healthy? That's what actual population research has shown.



I did not say anyhing, one way or the other, about the actual conservation status of polar bears.


You did however try to insinuate that Inuit are unreliable sources of data. Sadly, FF-Canuck was able to poke holes in your argument. Perhaps you should try something else; like protesting silently.
SFrank85





Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 2269
Reputation: 59.8
votes: 4
Location: Toronto - Scarborough Southwest

PostPosted: Thu Apr 16, 2009 9:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I wonder what the Scientists will come up with next? The Sun is the problem with our climate! :roll:
lucamanfredi





Joined: 31 Dec 1969
Posts: 170
Reputation: 41.3Reputation: 41.3Reputation: 41.3Reputation: 41.3
votes: 2

PostPosted: Thu Apr 16, 2009 11:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

From the Gospel according to Jeremy Clarkson:

Quote:
Contrary to what you may have been led to believe by Steiff’s cute and squishy cuddly toys, the polar bear is a big savage brute; the colour of nicotine, with a mean ugly pointy face and claws that, if they were to be found in Nottingham on a Saturday night, would be confiscated as offensive weapons.

If the polar bear dies out it will make not a jot of difference to you or anyone you’ve ever met. The only people who’ll even notice are the Innuits, and its passing will actually improve their lives because they’ll be able to go out fishing and clubbing without running the risk of being eaten to death.


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/t.....908938.ece
fkarcha





Joined: 16 Feb 2008
Posts: 31
Reputation: 33.3Reputation: 33.3Reputation: 33.3
votes: 3
Location: Winnipeg, MB

PostPosted: Thu Apr 16, 2009 11:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="TJRanth"][quote="fkarcha"]
FF_Canuck wrote:


You did however try to insinuate that Inuit are unreliable sources of data. Sadly, FF-Canuck was able to poke holes in your argument. Perhaps you should try something else; like protesting silently.


Poked holes in my argument -- for science -- by citing a scientist? You might want to rethink that. Traditional Ecological Knowledge is a dicey source of data to begin with and is much better suited for identifiying areas of scientific inquiry rather than being analyzed as the only data source. It is useful for constructing ecological histories of developments or climates that we have no reliable data for. But like all data it is not without its flaws, and I would hazard the guess that most people touting the Inuit now would rather they keep their information to themselves when a development is proposed.
Hasdrubal





Joined: 30 Oct 2006
Posts: 1112
Reputation: 66
votes: 5
Location: Nova Scotia

PostPosted: Thu Apr 16, 2009 12:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

SFrank85 wrote:
I wonder what the Scientists will come up with next? The Sun is the problem with our climate! :roll:

Due to Global Warming the Earth will become one massive blackhole by 2050.
TJRanth





Joined: 16 Feb 2009
Posts: 50
Reputation: 2

PostPosted: Thu Apr 16, 2009 1:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="fkarcha"][quote="TJRanth"]
fkarcha wrote:
FF_Canuck wrote:


You did however try to insinuate that Inuit are unreliable sources of data. Sadly, FF-Canuck was able to poke holes in your argument. Perhaps you should try something else; like protesting silently.


Poked holes in my argument -- for science -- by citing a scientist? You might want to rethink that. Traditional Ecological Knowledge is a dicey source of data to begin with and is much better suited for identifiying areas of scientific inquiry rather than being analyzed as the only data source. It is useful for constructing ecological histories of developments or climates that we have no reliable data for. But like all data it is not without its flaws, and I would hazard the guess that most people touting the Inuit now would rather they keep their information to themselves when a development is proposed.


No, moron, your argument that Inuit are unreliable sources of scientific data. I think everyone would appreciate you not being intentionally dense.
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 2

Goto page 1, 2  Next  


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Scientists Claim Earth Is Undergoing Natural Climate Shift

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB